S-EPMC7660844 - Cumulative Burden of Financial Hardship From Medical Bills Across the Spectrum of Diabetes Mellitus and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Among Non-Elderly Adults in the United States. - OmicsDI

Unknown

Dataset Information

Cumulative Burden of Financial Hardship From Medical Bills Across the Spectrum of Diabetes Mellitus and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Among Non-Elderly Adults in the United States.

ABSTRACT: Background Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) has a strong association with diabetes mellitus (DM), accounting for approximately two thirds of deaths in this patient population. Many individuals with ASCVD and DM are vulnerable to financial hardship associated with treatment-related expenses. Therefore, we examined the burden of financial hardship from medical bills across the spectrum of ASCVD status with and without DM. Methods and Results Using data from the National Health Interview Survey from 2013 to 2017, we used logistic regression analysis to examine the association of ASCVD and DM status with financial hardship and an inability to pay medical bills from a representative sample of non-elderly adults in the United States. Our study population consisted of 121 672 individuals. Approximately 3.1% of the weighted population had ASCVD, 5.6% had DM, and 1.3% had both ASCVD and DM. Nearly 50% of individuals with ASCVD and DM reported financial hardship from medical bills (23% being unable to pay medical bills at all), whereas ?28% of those with neither ASCVD nor DM reported financial hardship from medical bills (8% being unable to pay medical bills at all). Individuals with concurrent ASCVD and DM had the highest relative odds of expressing an inability to pay at all when compared with those with neither condition (odds ratio, 2.69; 95% CI, 2.21-3.28). Conclusions Individuals with concurrent ASCVD and DM are at a disproportionately high risk of being unable to pay their medical bills. The findings provide strong evidence for developing more effective public health policies that protect vulnerable populations from financial hardship.

SUBMITTER: Mszar R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7660844 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Cumulative Burden of Financial Hardship From Medical Bills Across the Spectrum of Diabetes Mellitus and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Among Non-Elderly Adults in the United States.

Mszar Reed R Grandhi Gowtham R GR Valero-Elizondo Javier J Caraballo César C Khera Rohan R Desai Nihar N Virani Salim S SS Blankstein Ron R Blaha Michael J MJ Nasir Khurram K

Journal of the American Heart Association 20200512 10

Background Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) has a strong association with diabetes mellitus (DM), accounting for approximately two thirds of deaths in this patient population. Many individuals with ASCVD and DM are vulnerable to financial hardship associated with treatment-related expenses. Therefore, we examined the burden of financial hardship from medical bills across the spectrum of ASCVD status with and without DM. Methods and Results Using data from the National Health Interv ...[more]

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWhile optimal cardiovascular risk factor (CRF) profile is associated with lower mortality, morbidity, and healthcare expenditures among individuals with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), less is known regarding its impact on financial hardship from medical bills. Therefore, we assessed whether an optimal CRF profile is associated with a lower burden of financial hardship from medical bills and a reduction in cost-related barriers to health.MethodsWe used a nationally representative sample of adults between 18 and 64 years from the National Health Interview Survey between 2013 and 2017. We assessed ASCVD status and the number of risk factors to categorize the study population into 4 mutually exclusive categories: ASCVD (irrespective of CRF profile) and non-ASCVD with poor, average, and optimal CRF profile. Adjusted logistic regression model was used to determine the association of ASCVD/CRF profile with financial hardship from medical bills and cost-related barriers to health (cost-related medication non-adherence (CRN), foregone/delayed care, and high financial distress).ResultsWe included 119,388 non-elderly adults, representing 189 million individuals annually across the United States. Non-ASCVD/optimal CRF profile individuals had a lower prevalence of financial hardship and an inability paying medical bills when compared with individuals with ASCVD (24% vs 45% and 6% vs 19%, respectively). Among individuals without ASCVD and an optimal CRF profile, the prevalence of each cost-related barrier to health was <50% compared with individuals with ASCVD. Poor/low income and uninsured individuals within non-ASCVD/average CRF profile strata had a lower prevalence of financial hardship and an inability paying medical bills when compared with middle/high income and insured individuals with ASCVD. Non-ASCVD individuals with optimal CRF profile had the lowest odds of all barriers to health.ConclusionOptimal CRF profile is associated with a lower prevalence of financial hardship from medical bills and cost-related barriers to health despite lower income and lack of insurance.

Project description:ImportanceCongenital heart disease (CHD) carries significant health care costs and out-of-pocket expenses for families. Little is known about how financial hardship because of medical bills affects families' access to essential needs or medical care.ObjectiveTo assess the national prevalence of financial hardship because of medical bills among families of children with CHD in the US and the association of financial hardship with adverse outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional survey study used data on children 17 years and younger with self-reported CHD from the National Health Interview Survey of US households between 2011 and 2017. Data were analyzed from March 2019 to April 2020.ExposuresFinancial hardship because of medical bills was classified into 3 categories: no financial hardship, financial hardship but able to pay medical bills, and unable to pay medical bills.Main outcomes and measuresFood insecurity, delayed care because of cost, and cost-related medication nonadherence.ResultsOf 188 families of children with CHD (weighted sample of 151 537 families), 48.9% reported some financial hardship because of medical bills, with 17.0% being unable to pay their medical bills at all. Compared with those who denied financial hardships because of medical bills, families who were unable to pay their medical bills reported significantly higher rates of food insecurity (61.8% [SE, 11.0] vs 13.6% [SE, 4.0]; P < .001) and delays in care because of cost (26.2% [SE, 10.4] vs 4.8% [SE, 2.5]; P = .002). Reported medication adherence did not differ across financial hardship groups. After adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, and maternal education, the differences between the groups persisted. The association of financial hardship with adverse outcomes was stronger among patients with private insurance than those with Medicaid.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, financial hardship because of medical bills was common among families of children with CHD and was associated with high rates of food insecurity and delays in care because of cost, suggesting possible avenues for intervention.

Project description:ImportanceHealth insurance is effective in preventing financial hardship from unexpected major health care events. However, it is also essential to assess whether vulnerable patients, particularly those from low-income families, are adequately protected from longitudinal health care costs for common chronic conditions such as atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).ObjectiveTo examine the annual burden of total out-of-pocket health expenses among low-income families that included a member with ASCVD.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cross-sectional study of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey from January 2006 through December 2015, all families with 1 or more members with ASCVD were identified. Families were classified as low income if they had an income under 200% of the federal poverty limit. Analyses began December 2017.Main outcomes and measuresTotal annual inflation-adjusted out-of-pocket expenses, inclusive of insurance premiums, for all patients with ASCVD. We compared these expenses against annual family incomes. Out-of-pocket expenses of more than 20% and more than 40% of family income defined high and catastrophic financial burden, respectively.ResultsWe identified 22 521 adults with ASCVD, represented in 20 600 families in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. They correspond to an annual estimated 23 million or 9.9% of US adults with a mean (SE) age of 65 (0.2) years and included 10.9 million women (47.1%). They were represented in 21 million or 15% of US families. Of these, 8.2 million families (39%) were low income. The mean annual family income was $57 143 (95% CI, $55 377-$58 909), and the mean out-of-pocket expense was $4415 (95% CI, $3735-$3976). While financial burden from health expenses decreased throughout the study, even in 2014 and 2015, low-income families had 3-fold higher odds than mid/high-income families of high financial burden (21.4% vs 7.6%; OR, 3.31; 95% CI, 2.55-4.31) and 9-fold higher odds of catastrophic financial burden (9.8% vs 1.2%; OR, 9.35; 95% CI, 5.39-16.20), representing nearly 2 million low-income families nationally. Further, even among the insured, 1.6 million low-income families (21.8%) experienced high financial burden and 721?000 low-income families (9.8%) experienced catastrophic out-of-pocket health care expenses in 2014 and 2015.Conclusions and relevanceOne in 4 low-income families with a member with ASCVD, including those with insurance coverage, experience a high financial burden, and 1 in 10 experience a catastrophic financial burden due to cumulative out-of-pocket health care expenses. To alleviate economic disparities, policy interventions must extend focus to improving not only access, but also quality of coverage, particularly for low-income families.

Project description:ImportanceFinancial hardship affects health care access and health outcomes among peripartum women.ObjectiveTo evaluate the prevalence of financial hardship among peripartum women over time and by insurance type and income.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study included peripartum women, defined as women aged 18 to 45 years who reported being currently pregnant or pregnant in the past 12 months, who participated in the National Health Interview Survey from 2013 to 2018. Data were analyzed from January to May 2021.ExposuresCurrent pregnancy or recent pregnancy as well as insurance type and income.Main outcomes and measuresThree measures of financial hardship within the last year were evaluated: (1) unmet health care need due to cost (unmet need for medical care or delayed or deferred medical care due to cost); (2) health care unaffordability (worry about paying for potential medical bills or existing medical debt); and (3) general financial stress (worry about subsistence spending [eg, monthly bills, housing]).ResultsThe study cohort included 3509 peripartum women, weighted to represent 1 050 789 women (2018: an estimated 36 045 of 184 018 [19.6%] Hispanic, 39 017 [21.2%] Black, and 97 366 [52.9%] White), with a mean (SD) age of 29 (6) years. Overall, from 2013 to 2018, 24.2% (95% CI, 22.6%-26.0%) of peripartum women reported unmet health care need, 60.0% (95% CI, 58.0%-61.9%) reported health care unaffordability, and 54.0% (95% CI, 51.5%-56.5%) reported general financial stress. The prevalence of financial hardship outcomes did not substantially change between 2013 and 2018 (unmet health care need in 2013: 27.9% [95% CI, 24.4%-31.7%]; in 2018: 23.7% [95% CI, 19.5%-28.6%]; health care unaffordability in 2013: 65.7% [95% CI, 61.1%-70.0%]; in 2018: 58.8% [95% CI, 53.4%-64.0%]; general financial stress in 2013: 60.6% [95% CI, 55.2%-65.8%]; in 2018: 53.8% [95% CI, 47.8%-59.8%]). Women with private insurance had lower odds of unmet need (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.87) but higher odds of health care unaffordability (aOR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.49-2.36) compared with women with public insurance. Peripartum women with household incomes less than 400% of the federal poverty level had higher odds of unmet need (aOR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.08-2.08) and unaffordable care (aOR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.54-2.55) compared with those with household incomes 400% or more of federal poverty level.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that financial hardship among peripartum women in the United States was common from 2013 to 2018, including 24% of pregnant and postpartum women reporting unmet health care need and 60% reporting health care unaffordability. Women with private insurance and those living on lower incomes were more likely to experience unaffordable health care than women with pubic insurance and those with higher incomes, respectively. Targeted policy interventions are needed to improve health care affordability and promote overall economic security among peripartum women.